Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re: Unless (Score 1) 232

by DaHat (#49502647) Attached to: Joseph Goebbels' Estate Sues Publisher Over Diary Excerpt Royalties

You're stating it wrong. When someone is dead you can say what you want about them.

No, you are over simplifying it.

The actionability of the utterance usually depends on when it was said... and as the Jesse Ventura vs Chris Kyle case so recently demonstrated, a dead man's estate can still be on the hook for damages. Had Ventura died first the case still could have proceeded provided the claim was made prior to death (and likely the suit as well).

Defamation aside, without a conviction or lengthy civil suit, the rights of the estate to the properties of the deceased/accused/etc does not end as it would with a conviction which goes to the heart of what I said above.

Comment: Re:Unless (Score 1) 232

by DaHat (#49502563) Attached to: Joseph Goebbels' Estate Sues Publisher Over Diary Excerpt Royalties

It is pretty clear what happens to the assets of criminals, especially with regard to crimes against humanity and especially when those assets have value derived from the commitment of those crimes.

Sorta... if you go on a killing spree, are convicted then try to sell your story you are going to have some legal problems & prohibitions.

If however while waiting for arrest/trial end up dead (either at the hands of the police or your own), anyone calling you a 'murder' would be at risk of suit a defamation suit from your estate as you were not actually convicted of that crime.

Perverse perhaps, but it follows from the whole concept of innocent until proven guilty. And while it is commonly accepted that Hitler, Goebbels and OJ Simpsons did some rather horrific things... I'm unaware of any criminal case where the Joseph Goebbels estate would have been denied the normal protections afforded to an unconvinced individual.

I'm not defending the practice, I'm just stating what is.

Comment: Re:Landing vs splashdown (Score 4, Insightful) 340

And the damage caused by landing on water with parachutes has got to be less than the explosions from the landings on the barges.

Probably not when they figure out how to land on the barge without exploding... at that point the damage from hitting the water and amount of cleaning & service required to be read for launch will be much more.

Comment: Re:Mamangement (Score 1) 290

by DaHat (#49408305) Attached to: Is This the Death of the Easter Egg?

So many assumptions, so little reality.

I would say something.

Even if your company has a strict prohibition against them?

I'd give him a pat on the back and maybe a small bonus, as long as it's suitably hidden and well done... playful,

So you've the ability to give away money at work for such non-work related things? Do please share where you work.

not obnoxious,

By whose/what standard? It's always fun discovering in a widely localized product what seems benign to one culture is horrible to another.

not going to get in anyone's way, etc.

So you can guarantee that for all users and use cases?

Customers like easter eggs.

Which customers are these? Those buying your 99 cent mobile app? Those buying a 50 dollar shrink wrapped or downloaded desktop app? Or those buying multi-thousand dollar enterprise systems?

Assuming the software is generally high quality, they're amusing, minor diversions that add a little fun for the users as well as the programmers.

Again, that depends on who your customer is and what their attitude is to unknown things being discovered in the software that was not documented and was not part of the RFP or compliance documentation.

What you see as a cute dancing frog or "Hello from the developers", some customers see as a sign of shoddy quality control and the possibility of backdoors.

Comment: Re:"ushering in the era of graphics on computers" (Score 2) 142

by DaHat (#49405199) Attached to: Microsoft Celebrates 40th Anniversary

A more intelligent person than the AC who said:

LOL. Which idiot wrote this summary? There were no "graphics on computers" before 1990 then?

There were cars before the Ford Model-T, would you claim that Ford did not user in the era of the horseless carriage?

There were electric cars before the Toyota Prius, but would you claim that Toyota did not user in the era of the electric car?

Ushering in the era doesn't mean you are first, but that you are the most effective/impactful.

By your logic, it should not be said that Apple ushered in the era of the smartphone or tablet, plenty of companies had them before... yet Apple was the first to get it right and establish broad appeal.

Comment: Re: Surprising (Score 1) 159

by DaHat (#49401715) Attached to: The Most Highly Voted Requests In Windows 10 Feedback Pool

Actually they did mention it. They just rolled it out - however it is currently for businesses

Just? Volume enterprise licensing in some form has been around for quite some time, under it you can deploy whatever supported version Windows or Office or other licensed software you like.

Office 365 is the only real new thing as it makes process a little more visible as an individual can sign up for a individual subscription as well.

Comment: Re: Invisible hand (Score 1) 536

I want to double down upon what you are saying as you know far better than the parent what is going on.

Just today I had sub-sub contractors from Comcast trying to fix the cable from the box across the street to my home for an issue I first reported the issue in mid-December but after a few months of nonsense things finally got worked out.

After first having a visit from a person who appeared to be a Comcast employee declaring the connection between my home and the distribution box across the street bad (I was seeing .1 mbs upload(should have been closer to 10mbs) yet semi-normal downloads), he wrote it up for replacement... and so began a multi-month process.

A week later received a note from a sub-contractor of Comcast (though with the Comcast letterhead on the door hanger and the sub-contractors name in the fine print) which said my cable needed to be replaced. Over the next couple of months I'd call them to check on the status with the work order # on the tag as things slowly worked their way through the Comcast and local city bureaucracies.

Eventually they told me that the work had been issued to a 'sub-contractor' (really a sub-sub-contractor) who took about a month to get things worked out as well between the city and them (which included two paintings of the paths of various utility lines under and around the street (much to the annoyance of the neighbors who didn't like the paint on their property)).

Finally the day of repair arrived (today) and they did their digging... alas they hit a rock when tunneling under the driveway of the neighbor in front of me (and right next to the distribution box) so they had to fill in most of what they did (amazingly professional in this way) and say that another team from the same company would have to come out in a week with a different boring machine to complete the work.

The pathetic thing about this whole process was that as far as Comcast is concerned, my issue has been resolved months ago by virtue of it being sent to an outside vendor... in the close out email even citing the fact that my signal strength had returned to normal (hint: it hadn't fully).

There is a part of me that is considering dropping Comcast service once this whole repair effort is complete (costing them $5-10k)... however they (unfortunately) provide the fastest internet for the price... when it works.

Dynamically binding, you realize the magic. Statically binding, you see only the hierarchy.